spencers
Apr 8, 02:10 PM
^^ Yup, in the E30! That's why I bought it after all: a cheap(er) easy to fix car that is predictable and balanced at its limit, even though that is relatively low compared to more modern suspension.
Oh darn, no preregister for you? If that didn't happen here, we'd have much too full of a day and less than 14 runs that we usually get. What are you going to bring to your event? Your 325Ci again? I LOVE the E46s....
Just curious though, can you go unstaggered wheel setup with the same size stock rears in the front? That's the only thing I don't care for on the E46.
Yes, my 325Ci. The car came with a square setup. 17x8" :) Guess I'm lucky!
14 runs is a lot!
Oh darn, no preregister for you? If that didn't happen here, we'd have much too full of a day and less than 14 runs that we usually get. What are you going to bring to your event? Your 325Ci again? I LOVE the E46s....
Just curious though, can you go unstaggered wheel setup with the same size stock rears in the front? That's the only thing I don't care for on the E46.
Yes, my 325Ci. The car came with a square setup. 17x8" :) Guess I'm lucky!
14 runs is a lot!
brepublican
Oct 4, 08:29 PM
This is HOT *****!! I'm keeping my fingers crossed for the 'true video iPod'. And a stunning live performance! By Dido or Alicia Keys - with SJ going 'Wooo' at the end of the live performance :D :D
And is it wierd that I keep watching last month's keynote (just the end of it though) for that sizzling John Legend performance?? I've seen it like more than thrice already...
And is it wierd that I keep watching last month's keynote (just the end of it though) for that sizzling John Legend performance?? I've seen it like more than thrice already...
applefan69
Mar 24, 04:27 PM
I never really liked OS X until 10.5.
GASP. your too picky, I fell in love with it at 10.3. Expose was a big thing in my opinion
GASP. your too picky, I fell in love with it at 10.3. Expose was a big thing in my opinion
mdntcallr
Oct 18, 03:24 PM
Please, this conversation is so 2005...
Optware also plans to release a holographic disk product for streaming video that's targeted at the film and broadcast industries, and a consumer disk product that is about the size of a credit card with 30GB of capacity.
hah, so funny, but then again, it has taken alot of time to make blu-ray hope this could come faster.
but.... it all depends on pricing. will holographic storage be cheaper? more reliable.
if so... sign me up. alot of us just want reliable storage.
but... with turner movies using it. sounds like a professional tier product, not consumer yet
Optware also plans to release a holographic disk product for streaming video that's targeted at the film and broadcast industries, and a consumer disk product that is about the size of a credit card with 30GB of capacity.
hah, so funny, but then again, it has taken alot of time to make blu-ray hope this could come faster.
but.... it all depends on pricing. will holographic storage be cheaper? more reliable.
if so... sign me up. alot of us just want reliable storage.
but... with turner movies using it. sounds like a professional tier product, not consumer yet
TheWheelMan
Mar 17, 12:53 PM
Really VictoriaStudent, lol I agree with BForstal on what people would do in the same situation 100 percent, and I'm not trying to brag about anything, and I cant even believe this thread has reached 3 pages. Sec I have no reason to troll!!! I have been a member of this forum since and even though I have never really posted anything I have found wealth of knowledge over the years from people in these forums. Wow and you cannot judge a person's character by a mistake a cashier made in a store!!! Like I said everybody is entitled to there own opinion, If you were to make note of the mistake to the store if it happened to you and it makes you feel so highly above any one else, more power to you. As far as I'm concerned this is one time I actually got a break on a apple product.
You're probably right, but the difference is that most would either have enough of a guilty conscience, or at least enough fear of getting busted, to NOT go telling it in a public forum and then copping some sort of superior attitude over it when criticized about it.
By knowingly taking it you did in fact break the law, and now you've publicly incriminated yourself to boot. Your morality is unfair to question given how the majority of people may have done the same thing (Meaning, "Who are we to judge?"). Your stupidity, however, is quite evident, and those are the ones who usually end up paying for their crimes one way or another. Karma is, in fact, a b@tch. Especially when you paint a bullseye on your @ss and dare it to strike you down.
You're probably right, but the difference is that most would either have enough of a guilty conscience, or at least enough fear of getting busted, to NOT go telling it in a public forum and then copping some sort of superior attitude over it when criticized about it.
By knowingly taking it you did in fact break the law, and now you've publicly incriminated yourself to boot. Your morality is unfair to question given how the majority of people may have done the same thing (Meaning, "Who are we to judge?"). Your stupidity, however, is quite evident, and those are the ones who usually end up paying for their crimes one way or another. Karma is, in fact, a b@tch. Especially when you paint a bullseye on your @ss and dare it to strike you down.
Donz0r
Jan 9, 03:40 PM
Nice theory there, but out here in California, Pacific Standard Time, that wouldn't make a bit of sense as the time for the posting of the keynote.
In fact 9:41am PST is nearly the exactly time during the keynote that Steve announced the ****.
...You suck.
Honestly, you and the other person that mentioned it suck.
Thanks for ruining this.
In fact 9:41am PST is nearly the exactly time during the keynote that Steve announced the ****.
...You suck.
Honestly, you and the other person that mentioned it suck.
Thanks for ruining this.
balamw
Oct 10, 07:15 PM
I think Apple should keep the name "True Video iPod," just as a salute to all the rumor mongering.
I'd laugh. (and then buy one)
Do you think it's a coinkidink that the acronym for True Video iPod just so happens to be TVi? TVi, iTV, what's the difference.:p
B
I'd laugh. (and then buy one)
Do you think it's a coinkidink that the acronym for True Video iPod just so happens to be TVi? TVi, iTV, what's the difference.:p
B
jagolden
Sep 12, 07:22 AM
gahh!
brushed aluminium nano = good
no storage bump = bad
Yeah, I'd like a Nano with a form facto like the Mini except thinner with all metal enclosure. The Minis are tough, the Nanos feel cheap and don't take the same beating as a Mini. Considering the Mini is HD based and the Nano is flash based I think that says something. I (personally) don't care about a video iPod, I'd much prefer a Nano with video cappability as the video would only be a time filler for me waiting for appointments, etc.
As to "It's Showtime!" I'm afraid the general Apple/Mac population may be dissapointed. I have no inside information, simply a feeling based on what has or hasn't been said in the many forums.
In terms of devices for the masses, Apples been in a lull. They need to keep pulling rabitts out of the hat to impress people and drive sales.
The iPods and iTunes are tops but eventually they've got to address the biggest iPod issue and that's battery life. It's poor even for the flashed based units.
I listen to my iPod mostly at night. Granted the sound quality is not equal, but I cab get at least 4, 8-hour nights out of one AA battery in a RIO S10, 256K (or something), but only 2 nights out of a 1 gig shuffle or 4 gig Mini.
Other manufactures, especially Sony seem to be able to get incredible battery life. I understand there are differences in bitrate and coding involved, but it doesn't seem to account for the large discrepency in battery life.
brushed aluminium nano = good
no storage bump = bad
Yeah, I'd like a Nano with a form facto like the Mini except thinner with all metal enclosure. The Minis are tough, the Nanos feel cheap and don't take the same beating as a Mini. Considering the Mini is HD based and the Nano is flash based I think that says something. I (personally) don't care about a video iPod, I'd much prefer a Nano with video cappability as the video would only be a time filler for me waiting for appointments, etc.
As to "It's Showtime!" I'm afraid the general Apple/Mac population may be dissapointed. I have no inside information, simply a feeling based on what has or hasn't been said in the many forums.
In terms of devices for the masses, Apples been in a lull. They need to keep pulling rabitts out of the hat to impress people and drive sales.
The iPods and iTunes are tops but eventually they've got to address the biggest iPod issue and that's battery life. It's poor even for the flashed based units.
I listen to my iPod mostly at night. Granted the sound quality is not equal, but I cab get at least 4, 8-hour nights out of one AA battery in a RIO S10, 256K (or something), but only 2 nights out of a 1 gig shuffle or 4 gig Mini.
Other manufactures, especially Sony seem to be able to get incredible battery life. I understand there are differences in bitrate and coding involved, but it doesn't seem to account for the large discrepency in battery life.
dalvin200
Sep 12, 06:36 AM
I cant believe how much press Apple is getting. It was never like this before. IE. when the battery recall was on the news, the BBC/ITV were camped outside of Regent street's Apple store talking about the batteries and what went wrong and what not, even though Dell was involved too. Bit harsh I think.
But, it still suprises me about people and their iPods. I was at college the other day and someone had their iPod out. I pulled my first Gen iPod out my pocket and said "Now this is old school. You can only use this with a Mac" and the student said to me "Whats a Mac?"
After explaining that the iPod is made by a company called Apple, which has made PC's since the 70/80s, he then replied... "oooh, those computers are rubbish"
yeah, whatever you say mate...
EDIT: sorry, just a rant really... but on topic!
HAHAHAHA.. i hate that ignorant type!! ok, i've only switched to a mac at home, but used them loads at uni..
i dread to see how tonights news splashes all over the tech pages of bbc/itv/sky news etc.. tomorrow morning and how the ignorant masses react.
But, it still suprises me about people and their iPods. I was at college the other day and someone had their iPod out. I pulled my first Gen iPod out my pocket and said "Now this is old school. You can only use this with a Mac" and the student said to me "Whats a Mac?"
After explaining that the iPod is made by a company called Apple, which has made PC's since the 70/80s, he then replied... "oooh, those computers are rubbish"
yeah, whatever you say mate...
EDIT: sorry, just a rant really... but on topic!
HAHAHAHA.. i hate that ignorant type!! ok, i've only switched to a mac at home, but used them loads at uni..
i dread to see how tonights news splashes all over the tech pages of bbc/itv/sky news etc.. tomorrow morning and how the ignorant masses react.
fastlane1588
Sep 12, 07:47 AM
i thought the event started at 7est
JAT
Apr 17, 01:28 AM
Everything on the original iPhone was already in use by other phones. Apple simply combined them all together in one phone and made it simpler to use. It revolutionized yeah, by simply bringing that stuff to the front of peoples minds.
I'm confused. What are you denying in this post?
Apple has by far the most restrictive ecosystem. You can't even load applications that are not approved by Apple.
Unless....you really want to. Then you can just root your system and do whatever you want. Like, opening yourself up to malware. That was very popular with the Windows users.
I'm confused. What are you denying in this post?
Apple has by far the most restrictive ecosystem. You can't even load applications that are not approved by Apple.
Unless....you really want to. Then you can just root your system and do whatever you want. Like, opening yourself up to malware. That was very popular with the Windows users.
dr_lha
Oct 17, 09:58 AM
Before people start quoting VHS vs Betamax, can people use actual facts rather than urban legends?
For example: Betamax being superior to VHS is a myth, most people cannot tell the difference between the two formats. Read this excellent article:
http://technology.guardian.co.uk/online/comment/story/0,12449,881780,00.html
The real reason VHS beat Betamax is the following:
1. VHS had longer tapes, Betamax's tapes were smaller, and Sony had difficulty coming out with larger capacity tapes. Faced with one system that's standard tapes could record 1 hour and one that could do 3 hours, most people chose the latter (VHS).
2. Sony's tight grip on the Betamax format kept prices high and innovation low. VHS decks were cheaper and made by more manufacturers, and hence consumers had more choice.
3. The porn industry chose VHS.
For example: Betamax being superior to VHS is a myth, most people cannot tell the difference between the two formats. Read this excellent article:
http://technology.guardian.co.uk/online/comment/story/0,12449,881780,00.html
The real reason VHS beat Betamax is the following:
1. VHS had longer tapes, Betamax's tapes were smaller, and Sony had difficulty coming out with larger capacity tapes. Faced with one system that's standard tapes could record 1 hour and one that could do 3 hours, most people chose the latter (VHS).
2. Sony's tight grip on the Betamax format kept prices high and innovation low. VHS decks were cheaper and made by more manufacturers, and hence consumers had more choice.
3. The porn industry chose VHS.
Rocketman
Oct 2, 10:19 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Earlier this summer, Jon joined with Monique Farantzos to create DoubleTwist Ventures, the company face to Jon's recent endeavor. Apparently,
Having read a few messages in this thread, why doesn't Apple simply BUY Doubletwist. That seems their basis for calling Steve, who didn't give the idea the time of day.
Doubletwist should make an offer to Apple. Apple might be precluded from even making/initiating the offer for anti-trust reasons. Doubletwist should not go down this road to a vastly inferior consumer experience.
Rocketman
Earlier this summer, Jon joined with Monique Farantzos to create DoubleTwist Ventures, the company face to Jon's recent endeavor. Apparently,
Having read a few messages in this thread, why doesn't Apple simply BUY Doubletwist. That seems their basis for calling Steve, who didn't give the idea the time of day.
Doubletwist should make an offer to Apple. Apple might be precluded from even making/initiating the offer for anti-trust reasons. Doubletwist should not go down this road to a vastly inferior consumer experience.
Rocketman
STTMac
Apr 15, 01:29 PM
This a very bad render fake picture kind.... Where did you see any apple product with that ugly back edge??? If you open the metadata of the picture with aperture you'll see.... well a BIG nothing no signature from any camera that may be used to take the picture... So pixel mix, noise on the render, bad shadow from the light source... the list may keep going... Try harder dude this is a very bad FAKE!!!
You put in a bad light the iPhone much bad that your light from the render...:confused:
You put in a bad light the iPhone much bad that your light from the render...:confused:
balamw
Apr 12, 07:46 AM
Also Aero Peek,
control-tab and windows (command key?)-tab offer some cool ways to swap around active applications.
Aero Peek is definitely one of my favorite features in W7. However I still find Expos�/Spaces to suit my workflow better. I think Aero Snap though, is only a feature because of many apps and users desire to run full screen all the time.
The price of office is built into the price of the computer, just as the price of iLife is built into the price of a mac - standard accounting practice. You're really not getting iLife for free just like you're not getting office for free.
Picking a random PC from Best Buy (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Lenovo+-+Laptop+/+Intel%26%23174%3B+Pentium%26%23174%3B+Processor+/+15.6%22+Display+/+2GB+Memory+/+320GB+Hard+Drive+-+Black/1954496.p?id=1218303031767&skuId=1954496). I see:
Software package included
With Microsoft Office Starter 2010 (product key card required for activation; sold separately).
I think it's hard to compare that to iLife. (I realize Office Starter 2010 can do some limited stuff, but it's designed to upsell you on one of the other packages.)
B
control-tab and windows (command key?)-tab offer some cool ways to swap around active applications.
Aero Peek is definitely one of my favorite features in W7. However I still find Expos�/Spaces to suit my workflow better. I think Aero Snap though, is only a feature because of many apps and users desire to run full screen all the time.
The price of office is built into the price of the computer, just as the price of iLife is built into the price of a mac - standard accounting practice. You're really not getting iLife for free just like you're not getting office for free.
Picking a random PC from Best Buy (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Lenovo+-+Laptop+/+Intel%26%23174%3B+Pentium%26%23174%3B+Processor+/+15.6%22+Display+/+2GB+Memory+/+320GB+Hard+Drive+-+Black/1954496.p?id=1218303031767&skuId=1954496). I see:
Software package included
With Microsoft Office Starter 2010 (product key card required for activation; sold separately).
I think it's hard to compare that to iLife. (I realize Office Starter 2010 can do some limited stuff, but it's designed to upsell you on one of the other packages.)
B
hob
Nov 16, 07:44 AM
The Register reports (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/11/16/apple_amd_laptop_claim/) that Apple may be developing an AMD based solution, although details are very sketchy at this moment in time.
As they say, Core 2 Duo still has the lead, but there is the fact that AMD just bought ATI... Apple may prefer to get more bits from one supplier...
Hob
As they say, Core 2 Duo still has the lead, but there is the fact that AMD just bought ATI... Apple may prefer to get more bits from one supplier...
Hob
SynPiekarza
Mar 28, 02:28 PM
I do not think this is a bad move. I mean, Apple seems to believe (and so do I) that App Store will eventually be the best way to distribute apps for developers and to buy/get them for consumers. All they need to do now is get it up to speed. So they force developers to submit their apps to the App Store.
About "App Store only apps on Mac OS X", hmm.. I don't think Apple will make the same mistake twice. They once fell back because of lack of software for their system. They will be forced to have App Store rules flexible enough so that users can easily find all sufficient apps there. If they can't install them, they will switch platforms. If they do, Apple loses.
Either way, the user kind of wins so I wouldn't worry too much about it ;)
About "App Store only apps on Mac OS X", hmm.. I don't think Apple will make the same mistake twice. They once fell back because of lack of software for their system. They will be forced to have App Store rules flexible enough so that users can easily find all sufficient apps there. If they can't install them, they will switch platforms. If they do, Apple loses.
Either way, the user kind of wins so I wouldn't worry too much about it ;)
flopticalcube
Apr 21, 12:07 PM
Vote count before you vote: 2
Vote count after you vote down: 1 (net change: -1)
Vote count after you vote up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote down, then up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote up, then down: 1 (net change: -1)
The net effect of you voting is only a +1 or -1. Remember, you don't know who else clicked the vote button on that same post just before you did. When you load a page, the current vote loads. If you take a minute or even a few seconds to read a post and vote, others could have voted during that time. The vote counter doesn't dynamically update every time someone votes; it does only when you vote or refresh the page.
So it's a like/dislike system that nets the like/dislikes to a numerical value, assuming the dislikes are negative. That is why when you change from a vote down to an up, you are removing your dislike and adding a like. Correct?
EDIT: Counts are update after you make a selection so it may appear that your vote was not counted but the count may not be accurate on your page when you make the vote. Got it.
Vote count after you vote down: 1 (net change: -1)
Vote count after you vote up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote down, then up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote up, then down: 1 (net change: -1)
The net effect of you voting is only a +1 or -1. Remember, you don't know who else clicked the vote button on that same post just before you did. When you load a page, the current vote loads. If you take a minute or even a few seconds to read a post and vote, others could have voted during that time. The vote counter doesn't dynamically update every time someone votes; it does only when you vote or refresh the page.
So it's a like/dislike system that nets the like/dislikes to a numerical value, assuming the dislikes are negative. That is why when you change from a vote down to an up, you are removing your dislike and adding a like. Correct?
EDIT: Counts are update after you make a selection so it may appear that your vote was not counted but the count may not be accurate on your page when you make the vote. Got it.
SilentPanda
Apr 21, 11:50 AM
If I want to revert to apathy from a previously engaged stance, I can't. I have to actively disapprove or actively approve.
That is true. Just make sure you never want to revert to apathy and you'll be fine.
It's also a system that currently serve no purpose whatsoever on these forums. People are worrying about it way too much.
That is true. Just make sure you never want to revert to apathy and you'll be fine.
It's also a system that currently serve no purpose whatsoever on these forums. People are worrying about it way too much.
Much Ado
Jan 9, 01:49 PM
I'm not chancing it. I've made my own HTML to do it for me :P
Very nice, my friend. But if you will allow me to improve your idea:
<html>
<head>
Very nice, my friend. But if you will allow me to improve your idea:
<html>
<head>
Bonte
Oct 29, 10:26 AM
Remember the years of the clones? Apple is a whole widget company. They will not suceede by emulating M$ and selling software to other peoples hardware. Ever.
Steve wasn't on board with the first clones and Apple wasn't on Intel yet, in my eyes there have been clear signs (now and in the past) that Apple and Steve are still open for the idea of licensing osX to other vendors if necessary. There big time investors also won't take 'just because' as an answer to why Apple won't license there OS, if the growth stops than there is no alternative.
Don't forget hell did froze over several times lately.
Steve wasn't on board with the first clones and Apple wasn't on Intel yet, in my eyes there have been clear signs (now and in the past) that Apple and Steve are still open for the idea of licensing osX to other vendors if necessary. There big time investors also won't take 'just because' as an answer to why Apple won't license there OS, if the growth stops than there is no alternative.
Don't forget hell did froze over several times lately.
Nekbeth
Apr 26, 10:29 PM
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
Update *** "I though it worked but the timer kept going on the background.
crashed :confused:
wlh99, do you get an exception in the invalid method " [myTimer Invalidate]" ?
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
Update *** "I though it worked but the timer kept going on the background.
crashed :confused:
wlh99, do you get an exception in the invalid method " [myTimer Invalidate]" ?
TheNewDude
Nov 8, 02:09 PM
Yeah, pre-ordered mine at Best Buy. Will go there tomorrow and pick up my copy!! A busy weekend coming up!!!
sailnavy
Jan 15, 02:13 PM
So are we ever going to see Time Machine support for the TB drive I bought for my AEBS in preparation for Time Machine release?
No comments:
Post a Comment